Another victim has come forward and accused the voice of Sesame Street’s Elmo of engaging in pedophilia. Kevin Clash, the 28-year voice of Elmo, has resigned from the show after another alleged victim has come forward, this time in court. Cecil Singleton has sued Clash for engaging in sexual conduct with the boy when he was 15. Singleton is the second victim to come forward.

“Sesame Workshop’s mission is to harness the educational power of media to help all children the world over reach their highest potential. Kevin Clash has helped us achieve that mission for 28 years, and none of us, especially Kevin, want anything to divert our attention from our focus on serving as a leading educational organization. Unfortunately, the controversy surrounding Kevin’s personal life has become a distraction that none of us want, and he has concluded that he can no longer be effective in his job and has resigned from Sesame Street. This is a sad day for Sesame Street.”

(outrageous emphasis all mine.)

Let’s deconstruct the statement. First the praise: “Kevin Clash has helped us achieve that mission for 28 years.” Really? What will PBS do when we learn that Clash’s access to children through Sesame Workshop may have resulted in abuse the same way Jerry Sandusky’s access to kids at Penn State did? Will PBS stand by Clash the same way the statement does?

Pedophiles notoriously enter professions that give them access to children. Like a fisherman with a lure, they rely on puppets, football tickets, candy, balloons, toys and worse to attract victims. Did Clash’s “achievement” of the PBS “mission for 28 years” have a darker side? It seems strange that his employers would tout his good work.

Must nitpick for just a moment: This isn’t pedophilia at issue. It’s ephebophilia. Clash preyed not on young children in the single digits, but on adolescents in the bloom of youth. Note that this is ONLY a question of vocabulary; both are morally repugnant.

Good point. I was thinking someone needs to make a distinction between molesting young children and engaging in sexual activities with someone in a sexually active demographic. Agreed that it does not excuse the crime, but the nature of the crime could be quite different, depending on how the victim experiences it.

“It’s ephebophilia, not pedophilia” is a concept being pushed heavily by the gay rights movement. They are obsessed with the idea of old men “helping” young men “come out.” (The rest of us see that as preying on the vulnerable.)

The very word “ephebophilia” is a foot in the door to loosening up the unsuspecting public for the next step down the slope. For sane people it needs to be regarded as an utterly ridiculous distinction.

The guy’s been accused. He hasn’t been found convicted, or tried, or even had the claims investigated. Right now, he’s innocent.

Sesame workshop did the right thing. Supposed they’d gone all lynch-mob, then this second accusation (which comes with a civil claim for 5 million dollars for psychological issues only very recently realised) also comes to naught?

Innocent until, well, at least credibly demonstrated to be guilty doesn’t go out the window just because you don’t like public broadcasting and the crime is a serious one.

But due to his position, it is a political issue – he had to stand down.

Does doing “the right thing” includ keeping his photo up at their webpage? Does it also include the disgusting press release? Imagine if Penn State or a Catholic diocese issued that sort of press release and kept the accused priest’s photo featured prominently. Presumption of innocence is for the courts, not for the orginizations that place accused pedophiles in the proximity of children.

“… not for the orginizations that place accused pedophiles in the proximity of children”

Oh, only for certain allegations, or perhaps people. I see.

If this guy has been fired, or resigned or whatever, then he’s not being “placed” in the proximity of anyone. He’s no longer in that position, and that’s what I mean by “doing the right thing”. He’s not working in that capacity any more, and his face is all over the papers. I’d say his (alleged) threat to youngsters is somewhat reduced.

As for the rest – like I said, should they join the lynch mob or presume innocence? The accusers so far are hardly model accusers – one keeps changing his story, the other one’s skipped the criminal process entirely and gone straight for a civil claim for $5 million. It’s possible that they’re both telling the truth, and we might even find out some day. But without somebody testing those claims, I’m inclined to go “hmm”.

Sesame workshops has, apparently, decided that 28 years of service deserves some dignity, at least until somebody actually proves wrongdoing. They’re in a difficult position and I think they’ve struck a reasonable compromise. If the elmo guy loses his case(s), then it’ll be appropriate for his picture to be taken down then.

And it’s hardly a “whitewash”. There’s no suggestion of a cover-up at all. And I hardly think the sadusky case is a fair comparison. There isn’t any doubt about sandusky did – there is (at very least) reasonable doubt about this new case.

No, there isn’t at this time. Mr. Adams desperately and permanently damaged his credibility in my eyes, by writing passionately about SpaceX whereof he knew not. Outside of his narrow field where he has actual expertise, I take everything he writes with a grain of salt.

You seem to be comfortably assuming the first accuser who went away with paltry cash in hand, wasn’t a false accuser who was just after money, and that the second wasn’t also after a payout. Neither you nor I know enough to assume guilt.

“It seems strange that his employers would tout his good work.”

Not when that’s all they know of him. If you know anything else you should be talking to the police instead of trolling.

And I agree your shooting fish in a barrel, I just don’t know enough to assume you’ve got the right fish for the right reasons.

I have been saying for years now that the next agenda for the far left is the legalization of pedophilia. Is there any wonder that more cases like this will be whitewashed when the perp is a leftie icon. Think Roman Polanski and others.

The only way Mr. Clash could’ve had any harsh words spoken of him before trial is if he’d played Lacrosse for Duke University.

But being a “talented artist” means being judged by different standards, at least according to the Whoopi Defense that PBS seems to be running with.

However, in making my social observations I don’t wish to create the impression I’m advocating a full-on Group of 88 lynch mob here, so I feel it necessary to reiterate that Mr. Clash is innocent until proven guilty. I am, however, struck by PBS’ apparent attitude that even if he is guilty he’s not “guilty” guilty because of the good work he’s done and his talent and so forth. The Whoopi Defense is indeed on full display here.

Right now, he’s not guilty. He’s accused. When/if he IS guilty, then I expect their response will change.

The comparison with the duke case goes both ways.

In any case, I fear that “guilt” is not something likely to ever be determined by these suits, and certainly not to criminal standards. AFAIK they’re both civil suits, and it’s not clear that one of them is even alleging anything that would be considered illegal (if true).

Apparently it doesn’t. Where was the presumption of innocence when the Group of 88 was THANKING a student lynch mob openly calling for the sexual mutilation of three innocent men without trial, jury, or conviction?

My position isn’t even slightly equivalent to the Duke Lacrosse case. You’re either exaggerating what I’ve said beyond any reasonable interpretation or downplaying the Group of 88-endorsed giant “CASTRATE!” banner. (Or perhaps you were unaware of just how ghoulish the Group of 88 and their students truly are.)

At no time have I suggested that the accused be punished in any way before a finding of fact and fair trial, although the precautionary step of keeping him away from children until the question is resolved seems like a necessary evil at this point. How you relate that to the giant “CASTRATE!” banner that greeted the Duke Lacrosse team courtesy of the Group of 88 is beyond imagining.

While you’re fundamentally right about the need to maintain the presumption of innocence, PBS’ response that allegations of this extremely serious nature are a “distraction” to be ignored is too extreme in the other direction. Even more outrageous is PBS’ apparent attitude that the “good work” of the accused would mitigate his hypothetical guilt — should he be guilty, which again would require the finding of a jury.

PBS is setting the table with a “Whoopi Defense”. They haven’t said, “We think he’s innocent,” which would be forgivable, or, “He deserves the presumption of innocence and we reserve judgment,” which would be unimpeachable, but rather, “He’s such a great artist who cares about his personal life?” which is abhorrent. I take issue with that whether or not the accused is guilty. PBS is guilty either way.

To your final point, if activity with a 15-year-old did take place where did it happen and what is the age of consent at that location? Whether or not the alleged activity is a crime would seem to depend on that … provided it actually happened, of course.

“My position isn’t even slightly equivalent to the Duke Lacrosse case”

You proposed the comparison. You invoked the duke case to imply that if the same situation applied in this case then the alleged perp would be criticised by PBS (summarised, obviously). You seemed to think that your comparison was some sort of slam dunk, demonstrating hypocrisy on the part of the left.

I’m pointing out that the duke case shows precisely why the presumption of innocence ISN’T just for the courts. The gang of 88 and the “whoopi defence” aren’t relevent – call it what you like but the guy is, right now, not guilty of anything. He _has_ been removed from his position, which is not only prudent ethically, but also politically.

“To your final point, if activity with a 15-year-old did take place where did it happen and what is the age of consent at that location?”

From the allegations I’ve read, it would have been New York and it would have been a crime. But the next important question is – what is “it” that happened? The age of consent applies to some fairly specific things. No doubt this will all be debated extensively in the coming weeks.

Of course it’s a slam dunk. Whether the guy is guilty or not there is no denying the double standard as measured against the response to the Duke Lacrosse accusations. Again you seem to have missed that I’m criticizing the double standard on its own merits, not calling for a Group of 88 style lynch mob to balance the scales.

Should the Whoopi Defense — PBS’ exact word was “distraction” — have been used for the Duke Lacrosse team it would’ve been just as wrong in that context, i.e. “These allegations distract from the important mission of playing Lacrosse,” but of course what happened to the Lacrosse players went to the opposite extreme.

The right way to respond to sex crime allegations is to presume the innocence of the accused while at the same time taking the accusations seriously. In the Duke Lacrosse case we got the Group of 88 lynch mob; in the PBS case we got the Whoopi Defense. Both of those reactions lie on opposite extremes, and the political bias is pretty obvious. Somewhere between “CASTRATE!” and “distraction”, between the lynch mob and the Whoopi Defense, is the right response.

“The right way to respond to sex crime allegations is to presume the innocence of the accused while at the same time taking the accusations seriously”

Exactly! What I get out of Adams’ writing and the headline–which he and other pjm writers have been at pains to point out, they do not control–is that because it’s a PBS personality, they are all in with a conclusion of guilty.

This is trash yellow journalism, and no part of being either a responsible informer of the public or a happy warrior for the right.

You’re comparing the astonishing (and appalling) actions of a bunch of academics with a much more reasonable action by sesame workshop – which is, I point out, AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT GROUP OF PEOPLE – 6 years later. In a different place, in relation to an entirely different case.

Is everything to you just a comparison with the duke lacrosse team case?

At the risk of substituting a substantial discussion with your “whoopi defence” distraction … I’m not sure that whoopi goldberg ever actually said that polanski could be defended because of who he is or what he’s achieved. Her (bizarre) defence was that his crime wasn’t “rape-rape”. If you’ve got a link to an instance of her actually saying what you suggest she did, please post it.

@Tom Perkins:
Where do you get that anyone here jumped to conclusions?
“Another alleged victim has come forward,” includes the word “alleged”. You should read more carefully.

@Techno:
If you read carefully you’ll notice the word “opposite” referencing the Duke Lacrosse comparison, making what I wrote not the direct comparison to which you directed your misguided criticism but a contrast of two opposite extremes.
As with Mr. Perkins above you should read more carefully.

Both of you seem to miss — once again — that the criticism of PBS has to do with their blase’ attitude toward child sexual abuse allegations. True or false they should be taken seriously, not dismissed as a “distraction”.

There’s a storm coming. We’re being desensitized and prepped for the next perversion in the hierarchy. The same way pedophiles “groom” children for rape, they are grooming the entire public.

The surprise that’s on the horizon is the discovery of just how many people regard sex with children as “A-OK,” “a crime invented by a fear of sex,” and something “desperately in need of normalization.” Teaching sex ed at younger and younger ages is a huge step. They need to destroy childhood and make kids “more sophisticated.”

The sane people are very suddenly going to find themselves a smaller group than they ever imagined they were, and totally unprepared for the fight they’ll need to fight. The gay rights movement has successfully managed to tar their opponents as “exactly the same as racists in the fifties.” That tactic is going to be hauled out and used all over again.

The sexual perversions touted and encouraged by the community of homosexuals is rampant in American society…. Disney World, Sponge Bob and, yes, the PBS broadcasting that we as taxpayers are paying for in order to ruin our children’s values.

This is dead wrong. Children and young people are being ruined and degraded for the rest of their lives.

It is time to stop being afrid to speak up for values. This tip toeing around the issue, which is sinful behavior against our children, has got to stop!

Oh, you’re one of the idiots who gets upset that Disney doesn’t screen guests for orientation at the gate. The “gay days” that people shriek and wail about are not endorsed or sanctioned by Disney — they’re organized by an outside group. They reserve facilities at the parks just like anyone else can, and pay the same rates as everyone else.

And if anyone ever commits “sinful behavior” against a child at Disney World, tell one of the people who work there. They’ll have security there faster than you can blink.

stop funding PBS !!!! funny how the libs love to raise taxes on everyone except big bird that makes over 100m a year in merchandising. as long as you push the liberal line you too can be a pedo and stay in the good graces of the state media. LIVE FREE or DIE!